User talk:Andrewc2

Speedy deletion of Oligo Primer Analysis Software
A tag has been placed on Oligo Primer Analysis Software, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Themfromspace (talk) 21:40, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

advice
As reviewing administrator, I think the article is now referenced well enough not to be a re-creation, and I declined to speedy it. What it needs now is actual quotes from two or three of the articles saying explicitlythat its widely used, not just examples of its use. The gsearch line cannnot be used in the text, only on the talk page, & to find the references. Helpful info for similar articles has been from links from university pages using it for instructional purposes. It also needs to be made exactly clear when it is being used as a specific name and when it might be being used generically--if this is actually a true name it might not have been the wisest choice compared with something more distinctive, so you'll have to cope with that. It should also have an external link to the site for the product itself--that's an acceptable place to put it. You might also want to see our Business FAQ (which also applies to articles like these) If Rychlik (one or both) have an real position as fulll professor at a major university, try an article on that as well, but only if. It would additionally help to give the number of references to the key methods papers from Scopus or Web of Science. DGG (talk) 23:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Single Purpose Account
Consider reading WP:SPA. Tstrobaugh (talk) 21:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

advice
Yes, it would be good if you also contributed to some other articles in the general area, of course without adding references to this particular software or its manufacturer or inventor.

It probably would look less like an advertisement if you removed some of the references. They may have helped prove the article was important for the AfD, but the reviews have now shown this sufficiently. I would leave in only the most important one in each of the application areas.  DGG ( talk ) 22:42, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for advices. I have removed most of references leaving only one per application. If you feel, that there are e.g. too many applications listed, please let me know, so I will cut them according to your suggestions, and therefore reduce the references even further. Regards, Andrewc2 (talk) 19:37, 6 March 2011 (UTC)